Andrea Menaker

Andrea has served as counsel in numerous significant international arbitrations and related proceedings including :

Tethyan Copper Company Pty Ltd. v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan: represented Pakistan in an ICSID revision proceeding in connection with an arbitration under the Australia-Pakistan BIT arising out of a dispute concerning the world's largest undeveloped copper mining project that had resulted in an award in excess of US$ 6 billion.  Represented Pakistan in the successful settlement of the case, which will result in the development of the project and will bring innumerable benefits to Pakistan and, particularly, the Province of Balochistan.

Oxus Gold PLC v. Republic of Uzbekistan: represented the Republic of Uzbekistan in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the UK-Uzbekistan BIT in a dispute concerning mines containing gold, silver, and other metals. Successfully defeated more than 99% of the claimant's $1.3 billion claim.

Metal Tech, Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan: successfully represented the Republic of Uzbekistan in an ICSID arbitration under the Israel- Uzbekistan BIT in a dispute arising from a joint venture engaged in mineral processing, obtaining dismissal of all claims by proving corruption in the making of the investment.

The Renco Group, Inc. v. Republic of Peru: successfully represented the Republic of Peru in an UNCITRAL arbitration brought under the US-Peru FTA in a dispute concerning a metallurgical complex, obtaining dismissal of all claims.

Glamis Gold Ltd. v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the NAFTA in a dispute concerning federal and state actions taken with respect to the claimant's mining claims, obtaining dismissal of all claims and an award of costs.

Daniel W. Kappes and Kappes, Cassiday & Associates v. Guatemala: representing claimants in an ICSID arbitration under the DR-CAFTA arising from their gold mining investments. Successfully defeated respondent's preliminary objections and awaiting a ruling on the merits.

Kornikom EOOD v. Republic of Serbia: representing the claimant in a pending ICSID arbitration under a BIT in a dispute concerning an underground coal mining operation.

Gramercy Funds Management LLC and Gramercy Peru Holdings LLC v. Republic of Peru: represented Peru in defending against a $ 1.9 billion claim alleging treaty breaches arising from Peru's issuance of 1969-era Agrarian Reform bonds. Claimants were awarded only sunk costs.

Cairn Energy Plc v. Republic of India: defended India across multiple jurisdictions in which Cairn Energy PLC and Cairn UK Holdings Ltd. sought to enforce a $1.4 billion investment treaty arbitral award  arising out of a dispute in connection with imposition of a tax.

JSC BTA Bank v. Kyrgyz Republic: represented JSC BTA Bank in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the Kazakhstan-Kyrgyzstan BIT in a dispute arising out of an investment in a bank. 

Abaclat and others v. Argentine Republic: represented tens of thousands of Italian bondholders of Argentine sovereign bonds in an ICSID arbitration under the Italy-Argentina BIT.

Devas v. Republic of India: defending India across multiple jurisdictions (U.S., U.K., France, Australia and Canada) in which the claimants have been pursuing enforcement of an approximate $150 million award against India issued by a Netherlands-seated Permanent Court of Arbitration tribunal in an arbitration arising under the Mauritius-India BIT.

Deutsche Telekom AG v. Republic of India: defending India across multiple jurisdictions (U.S., Singapore, Germany) against enforcement of a $132 million award pursued by Deutsche Telekom issued by a Swiss-seated tribunal in an arbitration arising under the Germany-India BIT.

Federal Elektrik Yatirim ve Ticaret A.Ş. and others v. Republic of Uzbekistan: represented the Republic of Uzbekistan in an ICSID arbitration under the Turkey-Uzbekistan BIT and the ECT in a dispute concerning the natural gas industry.

Vladislav Kim and others v. Republic of Uzbekistan: represented the Republic of Uzbekistan under the Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan BIT in a dispute concerning two cement plants.

Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide v. Republic of the Philippines: represented the Republic of the Philippines in an ICSID annulment proceeding defending an award dismissing the claimant's claims in respect of a dispute concerning an airport terminal.

Philippine International Air Terminals Co., Inc. v. Republic of the Philippines: successfully represented the Republic of the Philippines in an ICC arbitration seated in Singapore in a dispute concerning an airport terminal, obtaining dismissal of all claims and an award of costs.

JSC Mechanical Plant and Others v. The Kyrgyz Republic: represented the claimants in an ICSID Additional Facility arbitration under the Uzbekistan-Kyrgyzstan BIT and Kyrgyz Foreign Investment Law in a dispute concerning the expropriation of their hotel properties.

TECO Guatemala Holdings, LLC v. Guatemala: successfully represented TECO, a US electricity company, in an ICSID arbitration under the DR-CAFTA arising from its investment in an electricity distribution company, obtaining an award for violation of the treaty and for costs, and successfully represented TECO in ICSID annulment proceedings, defending the award and allowing TECO to pursue further damages and interest claims. Subsequently, obtained a significant award in the resubmission proceeding and represented TECO in another annulment proceeding brought by Guatemala.

WorleyParsons International v. Republic of Ecuador: representing claimant in an investment arbitration under the Ecuador-US BIT in a dispute arising out of project management contracts for large oil and gas projects.

Orascom TMT Investments S.à r.l. v. People's Democratic Republic of Algeria: represented OTMTI in an ICSID arbitration under the Belgo-Luxembourg-Algeria BIT in a dispute arising out of an investment in the telecom industry and represented OTMTI in the ensuing ICSID annulment proceeding.

Methanex Corp. v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the NAFTA concerning a dispute challenging California's regulations banning the use of a gasoline additive, obtaining dismissal of all claims and an award of costs.

Hanocal Holding B.V. and IPIC International B.V. v. Republic of Korea: represented the claimants in an ICSID arbitration under the Netherlands-Korea BIT.

X v. Y State: advised the investors on the feasibility of bringing annulment proceedings after an adverse award in an ICSID arbitration involving a Central European State.

Roz Trading Ltd. v. Coca-Cola Export Corp., Republic of Uzbekistan and OziqOvqatSanoat: represented the Republic of Uzbekistan and OziqOvqatSanoat in a Vienna Centre arbitration in a dispute arising out of a joint venture agreement to bottle and distribute Coca-Cola products.

In re Consolidated Softwood Lumber Proceedings: successfully represented the United States in a consolidated UNCITRAL arbitration under the NAFTA brought by three Canadian softwood lumber companies in a dispute involving challenges to US antidumping and countervailing duties imposed on Canadian softwood lumber and the Byrd Amendment, obtaining dismissal or withdrawal of all claims and an award of costs against one of the claimants, and successfully represented the US in related set-aside proceedings.

In re NAFTA Chapter Eleven/UNCITRAL Cattle Cases: successfully represented the United States in an UNCITRAL consolidated arbitration under the NAFTA involving more than 100 claimants in a dispute challenging the United States' closure of the border to imports of Canadian cattle, obtaining dismissal of all claims.

Grand River Enterprises Six Nations, Ltd. and others v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in the jurisdictional phase of this UNCITRAL dispute under the NAFTA concerning action taken in connection with the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between various state attorneys general and the major tobacco companies, obtaining dismissal of significant portions of the claim.

ADF Group, Inc. v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in an ICSID Additional Facility arbitration under the NAFTA in a dispute concerning federally funded state highway procurement practices, obtaining dismissal of all claims.

The Loewen Group, Inc. and others v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in an ICSID Additional Facility arbitration under the NAFTA in a dispute concerning litigation in Mississippi state courts and subsequent actions in federal court seeking to set aside the award.

Mondev Int'l Ltd. v. United States of America: successfully represented the United States in an ICSID Additional Facility arbitration under the NAFTA in a dispute concerning litigation in Massachusetts state courts, obtaining dismissal of all claims.

United States of America v. India: represented the United States in an arbitration arising under the Investment Incentive Agreement for losses sustained by US investors and lenders to an energy project, obtaining a favourable settlement.

Represented the United States in several arbitrations under NAFTA Chapter Eleven to which the Governments of Canada and Mexico were parties, such as S.D. Myers Inc. v. Canada, Pope & Talbot v. Canada, UPS, Inc. v. Canada, Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. United Mexican States, GAMI Investments, Inc. v. United Mexican States, Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa v. United Mexican States, International Thunderbird Gaming Corp. v. United Mexican States, and Bayview Irrigation District, et al. v. United Mexican States, where the United States invoked its right to make submissions on issues of treaty interpretation.